Ramblings of an old Doc

 

You probably don’t need it most days (but, you’ll never know which days). In fact, you might or might not encounter a “drive by” for days or weeks. But, AV-Comparatives (AVC) did an interesting test on AVs (Antivirals). They tested when the AV actually loads. That’s not to say they’re actually protecting you during boot, but AVC didn’t actually test that.

Another caveat: They tested on new machines. That’s not exactly real world testing.

“To test a product's effect on day-to-day computer use, the researchers timed a number of common activities with no antivirus at all, averaging several runs, and then re-tested in the same way with the antivirus running. The tests included: copying files between drives; zipping and unzipping files; installing and uninstalling applications; transcoding music files; launching applications; and downloading files.”

- http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security-software/311241-speed-up-pc-performance-by-replacing-microsoft-s-built-in-antivirus

They found a big difference in system impact between some AV’s. One didn’t load until eleven minutes after boot initiation.

A philosophical difference: Some AVs would allow the virus to load and then whack it. I can’t agree with that approach. The malware should be whacked ASAP to prevent your having to repair services, etc.

So how much does each AV affect boot time? The sooner it boots, its effect will be felt. That might decrease on subsequent scans, both a good thing and under some circumstances a bad one since files flagged as safe might become infected. Other factors affecting boot time are age of computer, amount of filling of the hard disk, speed of processor, degree of fragmentation and amount of RAM will affect the boot speed as well. So, the AV probably doesn’t determine a heck of a lot when it comes to boot speed. It does affect a great deal with respect to boot safety. So, maintaining a lean, well tended to machine determines a great deal.

Here’s a screen shot of their results:

 

On this graph, the closer to the left the better.From BitDefender to the left, the AV’s earned the Advanced+ score.

AVC found that about one-third of the products tested affected boot time less than MSE (Microsoft Security Essentials). In fact, You might just boot faster with one of the Advanced+ AVs and without MSE which hasn’t been doing well at all in AVC’s testing.

Source:

http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/security-software/311241-speed-up-pc-performance-by-replacing-microsoft-s-built-in-antivirus


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on May 12, 2013

Ah....second best ain't bad...

on May 12, 2013

Actually quite excellent...boot time scanning and protection matter a great deal.

on May 12, 2013

Thread is confusing. It says malware but then refers to antivirus...

on May 12, 2013

Mine (being my own common sense) starts at the moment I wake up in the morning on most days. There are a few days when there may be a bit of a lag however.

on May 12, 2013

Fuzzy Logic

Thread is confusing. It says malware but then refers to antivirus...

Sorry, Fuzzeh. Meant to type antiviral. Fixed.

on May 12, 2013

Says the first have a .4, so I'd say a 3 way tie for first place.

on May 12, 2013

That list is questionable considering where Symantec/Norton ranks.  Actually, the rest of the list pretty much coincides with my experiences of each.  I've tested all of them at some point over the past 2 years.

on May 12, 2013

Does the graph measure seconds? Minutes?

It would be nice to know actual numbers as to how long things actually took.

on May 12, 2013

DivineWrath

Does the graph measure seconds? Minutes?

It would be nice to know actual numbers as to how long things actually took.

Link to the actual report:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/avc_per_201304_en.pdf

Nowhere are units mentioned, but it would seem (if only from logic) that the time unit is seconds.

 

on May 12, 2013

With systems having 4GB RAM or more these days does it really matter?

on May 12, 2013

DrJBHL



Quoting DivineWrath,
reply 8

Does the graph measure seconds? Minutes?

It would be nice to know actual numbers as to how long things actually took.


Link to the actual report:

http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/avc_per_201304_en.pdf

Nowhere are units mentioned, but it would seem (if only from logic) that the time unit is seconds.

 
See the summarized results in the full report for an explanation of the scoring.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/avc_per_201304_en.pdf

on May 13, 2013

kona0197

With systems having 4GB RAM or more these days does it really matter?

Yes.

As usual, you didn't bother to read the OP, or didn't understand it.

Don't troll this thread.

Believe me: I will eliminate any such answers, and those I deem an effort to hijack it.

 

 

on May 13, 2013

Trolling was never my intent. Simple misunderstanding.

on May 13, 2013

Kona...the issue is how quickly the AV activates and actually protects your machine on boot.  If one has a delay of 11 minutes before it is active then it's about next to useless....cos a heck of a lot can happen in 11 minutes....

on May 13, 2013

yuuuuuuuup, just another my dick is bigger than your dick Anti Virus comparison test. If the AV you are using right now works for you, then it is the right product for you. Who gives a flying frack if it takes a few extra microseconds to load or uses a couple of extra megabytes of memory in today's multigigabyte RAM systems. If it works GREAT. 

2 Pages1 2